Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 14:15:05 -0700 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: Nuno Teixeira <eduardo@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Cc: "se@freebsd.org" <se@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Upstream changed released versions from 1.0.2 -> 3025803779 (!) Message-ID: <E88504B4-2F84-4B86-BA35-BBF661C9D9B8@yahoo.com> References: <E88504B4-2F84-4B86-BA35-BBF661C9D9B8.ref@yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nuno Teixeira <eduardo_at_freebsd.org> wrote on
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2022 18:37:05 UTC :
> (...)
> And at this point I'm in doubt on what to use:
>=20
> DISTVERSION=3D 1.0.${GH_TAGNAME} || DISTVERSION=3D {GH_TAGNAME}
>=20
> :)
As far as I can tell, neither works by itself, overall.
This is because ${GH_TAGNAME} will not in general be
increasing: as far as I know it is just a hash and so
will look to be random from one update to the next.
If upstream does not make the text that identifies the
version allow sorting versions in release-sequence-order,
it would seem that the port must invent its own release
sequence tracking identification text. (But I'm no
ports infrastructure expert.)
I wonder if there are other ports that have to deal
with such --and if there are, what they did.
May be I'm wrong, but I thought that the ports
infrastructure required being able to compare strings
to identify newer vs. older.
Having ${GH_TAGNAME} after a textual prefix that always
allows the comparison would seem to be okay. But the
prefix with the property looks to be essential to me.
What a mess, even if I got the wrong understanding of
the ports infrastructure's requirements.
> Nuno Teixeira <eduardo@freebsd.org> escreveu no dia segunda, =
12/09/2022
> =C3=A0(s) 19:19:
>=20
> > Hi,
> >
> > I forgot to mention deskutils/treesheets port.
> >
> > I've been talking with Stefan se@ and he advised me to avoid =
PORTEPOCH
> > swithing from 1.0.2 -> gYYMMDD and use 1.0.2 -> 1.0.${GH_TAGNAME} =
where:
> > GH_TAGNAME=3D3025803779 (release version).
> > This way we avoid PORTEPOCH and be prepared for future 1.1.x version =
but
> > upstream told me that they will continue to use CI run ids as =
versions.
Wow: version identification text that is not sortable
into a release-sequence-order relative to past releases
at the time.
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> >
> > Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org> escreveu no dia segunda, 12/09/2022 =
=C3=A0(s)
> > 19:08:
> >
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> > > Recently, upstream change version naming from 1.0.2 -> =
3025803779
> >> based on CI run id as release tag.
> >> >
> >> > Which port is this for?
> >>
> >> deskutils/treesheets
> >>
=3D=3D=3D
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E88504B4-2F84-4B86-BA35-BBF661C9D9B8>